Tuesday, October 6, 2015

# 153 What if Scott Neeson was falsely charged with rape?




Chad, Chris Dawe
Imagine this:
APLE and/or the Trafficking Police issue a statement to the effect that Scott Neeson has been charged with rape. The names of the alleged victims are not mentioned but the statement contains sufficient detail for the rape charge to seem both genuine and serious.
The Phnom Penh Post writes a story. It turns out that the press release/statement upon which the story is based is factually incorrect. No charges against Neeson have been laid. Neeson has the documents to prove it.
What does the Post do? Correct its error? Retract its false statements about Neeson being a rapist? Remove the article from the internet and google search? Or do you both decide to do none of the above on the grounds that the Post was simply reporting the news as provided to it by credible and respected sources?
I use Scott Neeson in this hypothetical example for two reasons. Firstly, such an allegation would almost certainly destroy Scott’s reputation and the Cambodian Children’s Fund. Neeson would become persona non grata (as Liam Miller has) and be unemployable – all the more so if the Post did nothing at all to correct its error. The lingering impression for anyone who read the article, or for anyone who came upon it through a Google search would be that Scott Neeson had been charged with rape.
The other reason I use Neeson as an example is that if the same fate were to befall him as has befallen Liam Miller and David Fletcher, I would defend Neeson’s right to a far trial and to natural justice as vociferously as I defend Miller and Fletcher.  I would be asking the Phnom Penh Post why it was not correcting an error that has destroyed Neeson both personally and professionally. This is one of the roles of members of the 4th Estate. It is a very important role.
The Phnom Penh Post has failed in both the cases of Liam Miller and David Fletcher and, it would certainly seem from the newspaper’s track record, will similarly fail in any instance in the future where APLE is involved in a story.
My first letter to you, from December last year, speaks for itself. You did not respond to it. You have not responded to any of my communications.

Chad Williams
Editor in Chief Department
Phnom Penh Post

Charlotte Pert
Editorial
Phnom Penh Post

2nd Dec 2014

Dear Chad and Charlotte

On 14th Nov I wrote to David Boyle the following:

Dear David Boyle

On 21st March 2011, the Phnom Penh Post published an article entitled “Thailand To Extradite UK Rape Suspect”, written by Cheang Sokha. The article contained some inaccuracies that have never been corrected.

“THAILAND has reportedly ordered the extradition of a British man wanted in Cambodia on charges of sexually assaulting two underage girls.”
Mr Fletcher was not and has never been charged with “sexually assaulting two underage girls”
“David Fletcher, 65, fled the Kingdom last year after the British tabloid The Sunday Mirror alleged that he was using a charity he had founded, the Rubbish Dump project, to gain access to young girls at the Stung Meanchey dump site in Phnom Penh.”
Mr Fletcher did not ‘flee’ Cambodia. He had arranged to leave Cambodia well before Andrew Drummond’s article was published. This is well documented.
“Samleang Seila, director of the child rights group Action Pour Les Enfants, said Fletcher was set to stand trial at Phnom Penh Municipal Court on March 31 for allegedly raping two underage girls. Cambodian and Thai officials are still in the process of arranging Fletcher’s return, Samleang Seila said.”
Either Samleang Seila has been misquoted by the Phnom Penh Post or he is a liar. Mr Fletcher has never been charged with “raping two underage girls.”
Given that Mr Fletcher was not charged with the rape of two girls, why has the Phnom Penh Post never questioned Samleang Seila about his false allegation and published a retraction? By allowing this information to remain in the public domain, uncorrected, the Phnom Penh Post has contributed to the destruction of Mr Fletcher’s reputation.
The rest of my letter to David can be found at:
http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/36-will-phnom-penh-post-correct-errors.html
I did not receive a response from David and nor has the Phnom Penh Post sought to correct information published in the newspaper that was demonstrably factually incorrect.
Nor has the Phnom Penh Post reported in any way on David Fletcher’s recent court appearance on 20th Nov – despite having a journalist present in court. Why is this? Does the Phnom Penh Post believe that there is nothing newsworthy in a man being denied a trial by the same judges who, three weeks earlier, had promised him one?
At the very heart of this matter is the question:
Is a man accused of a crime in Cambodia entitled to a fair trial?
As we all know, innocent Cambodian men and women are denied the right to a fair trial every day. The difference between these cases and David Fletcher’s is that the Phnom Penh Post reports on the former but not the latter. Why?
Questions proliferate:
- Has the Phnom Penh Post thought to ask Thierry Darnaudet or Samleang Siela for their response to the allegation (made by Yang Dany herself) that their client was told to leave the country and not attend court?
- Has any Phnom Penh Post journalist thought to ask Thierry Darnaudet or Samleang Siela if Action Pour les Enfants paid the money required by Yang Dany to acquire a Cambodian passport at very short notice?
- Or, in the event that Yang Dany entered China illegally has any Phnom Penh Post journalist thought to ask Thierry Darnaudet or Samleang Siela if Action Pour les Enfants arranged to have her trafficked?
- Has the Phnom Penh Post thought to ask the Minister for Justice why it is that the same Phnom Penh Municipal Court judges who promised Mr Fletcher a re-trial on 27th Oct 2014, denied him this trial on 20th Nov 2014 and refused to look at any evidence that Mr Fletcher had in court with him or to even make a statement o the court?
- Has the Phnom Penh Post asked Naly Pilorge if she was a co-founder of APLE and, if so, why it is that she goes to such lengths to distance herself from the NGO; to ask whether she or LICADHO receive any financial remuneration from Actions Pour les Enfants?
Some important questions from June 2010 also remain unanswered and, it seems, unasked by anyone in the media:
- How was it, in the week after Andrew Drummond’s 20th June 2010 article, David Fletcher had ceased to be (in Yang Dany’s own words) her ‘fiance’, ‘boyfriend’’ ‘sweetheart’ and ‘a good man’ and become a rapist?
- Has the Phnom Penh Post made any effort at all to understand what took place during that week to cause such a dramatic turnaround?  Might the prospect of earning $30,000 in compensation have influenced Kheang Sekun’s decision to press charges against Fletcher? Why was it that 18 year old Yang Dany did not press the charges but, with some reluctance, allowed her mother to do so?
- Is it pure coincidence that David Fletcher, with no evidence of any crime committed by him on 20th June 2010, became a rapist one week after Scott Neeson’s comment to Andrew Drummond was published?
“If you can get this guy sent packing you are doing a service to the children here.” 

Does it not occur to the Phnom Penh Post that there are some striking similarities in so many cases that involve Action Pour les Enfants – men being convicted of rape when the medical evidence states that no rape took place?
The questions are legion but it seems that the Phnom Penh Post is loathe to ask any questions at all that might cast doubt of the honesty and integrity not just of APLE but of Scott Neeson.
The only way that David Fletcher can be guilty of raping Yang Dany is by accepting the proposition, presented by the judges at the Phnom Penh Municipal Court, that a young woman’s hymen can grow back.
Whilst David Fletcher is entitled to a fair trial, there is an important principle involved here also – namely that all who appear before a Cambodian court are entitled to a fair trial whether they be Khmer or expatriate. By remaining silent in this case, when the evidence is overwhelmingly against the possibility that David Fletcher is guilty of rape, the Phnom Penh Post is giving a green light to APLE to continue to set up other men in the future – secure in the knowledge that the Post will not ask the tough questions that need to be asked of this NGO.
best wishes
James Ricketson

26 comments:

  1. Oh christ. Now the Ricketson is going after another target. Does this guy never get bored? I suppose now his film career is over, he has little else to do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Confused, what is the new target?

      Delete
  2. Corruption is so broad and deep in Cambodia that it makes me wonder how anything can go right. How the press can ignore these issues beggars belief!! The truth will eventually come out and those involved will be exposed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ricketson is just a jealous, bitter person and will write defamatory blogs about anyone he doesn't likes (or as he says - just asks questions that are suggestive but not defamatory). You have to ask the question - What kind of person would be happy to create a blog that is continually negative and defamatory towards people with the sole intention of destroying reputations.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous 9.38

      Welcome back! Haven't heard from you for a few weeks now about what a jealous and bitter person I am. I thought, perhaps, that you had found a life. It seems not.

      You ask what kind of person would be happy to create a blog etc.

      It is the job of journalists, filmmakers and bloggers to ask questions that, very often, those being asked, do not want to answer. There is nothing peculiar in what I am doing. it is really run-of-the-mill.

      As for my 'defamatory' remarks I will, yet again, ask to which remarks/observations you are referring? You will not, of course, answer this question.

      As for 'destroying reputations', this is not my intention at all. Often, those I am asking questions of have been complicit in the destruction of others' reputations. I am thinking, specifically her of the reputations of Liam Miller and David Fletcher.

      Any and all of those to whom I direct my questions could so easily demolish me if they wished and if they had answers that revealed that my intention here was/is only to defame, be continually negative and to destroy reputations.

      If, for instance, what I have written about Liam Miller, and what Liam Miller has written about himself and his case, is deemed to be untrue or inaccurate by the Phnom Penh Post, Chad Williams, Chris Dawe or anyone else from the Post could very easily write:

      "James Ricketson is wrong. Liam Miller is wrong. Here is the sequence of events - all of which are backed up with documentary evidence..."

      If the Post were to go through this exercise, and it turned out that I had got my facts wrong, it would be beholden on me to acknowledge this, apologise and correct my mistakes.

      Simple.

      So, if you must come back again with your allegations please do back them up with facts, examples etc. Your vague generalised observations really do not contribute anything of value to this discussion.

      Delete
    3. You are simply a fucking idiot Ricketson!

      Delete
    4. James, seems that someone is not happy with facts and good logic. They do not benefit from having truth exposed. Now you have made them cry! Shame on you.

      Delete
  3. I think Chad Williams is a scumbag. Journalists have no integrity full stop but I must say he is worse than your typical journalist. I have seen Chad and one of his quality colleagues - a person by the name of Peter Boyle, smoking marijuana in bars. You might say who cares? but my point is that these two characters and many of the PP Post and Cambodia Daily journalists are just bottom of the rung plebs who have migrated to Cambodia because they are outcasts in their own country. I think people here need to stop looking at them as ethical figures.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If journalists and editors employed at the award-winning English language dailies in Cambodia are 'bottom rung plebs without integrity' because they work in Cambodia and smoke grass, what does that say about the integrity and social value of a journalist who works in Cambodia and can only muster an obscure personal blog dedicated to defending convicted sex offenders and attacking organizations that work to assist poor and abused children?

      Delete
    2. It says that you are both at the bottom end of the food chain!

      Delete
    3. Hanging out in druggy bars in Cambodia would seem to put you and the value or your opinion in pretty much that same boat, if not lower. At least the journalists are doing a worthy job for an important media outlet (if only in a small country), and James has dedicated himself and his time to what he sees as an important and valuable cause (justice and fairness under the law.) And you? From your Cambodian bar perch, what is it you imagine makes their kettle blacker than your pot such that you can sit in judgement?

      Delete
    4. Are you smoking crack?

      Delete
  4. Anonymous 12.45 AM , Blog 152
    Further to my comments this morning Blog 152 3.14AM .. re' meeting Alan Parkhouse of the PPP you asked me what motivation the Phnom Penh Post would have for admitting an error to me in private , then refusing to publicly admit their error ? Answer APLE
    I f you have read this Blog over the last few months it has been highlighted several times the refusal of the PPP to pursue stories that do not reflect well on CCF , or the recent court case of David Fetcher that they did not attend APLE was behind the Davd's case as well as my own.
    Their business model is based on numbers guilty or not does not matter , numbers matter ! more convictions mean more donations .
    In my case they published lies on their website that I had been charged with .rape and sexual assault , for the PPP then to say they had made an error would have contradicted what APLE was saying on ther website at that time .
    Conclusion .. What else can we believe other than APLE and CCF have an arrangement
    Liam Miller

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but that is quite a leap. I am not yet sure why (assuming your description of the meeting with the PPP editors is true and complete) the Post would not publish a correction/addendum of a simple "mistranslation," but to suggest that they would leave a demonstrable falsehood in an article solely because they don't want to contradict APLE on a little detail is not a credible explanation. It would not make any significant difference to the Post or APLE to publish a correction of a small, purely factual detail like the exact charges, especially on a case that was ultimately dismissed. It would not reveal anything important about APLE or the Post. After all, the actual charges and disposition of the case is a matter or public record, and are not determined by what the newspapers print. And everybody makes mistakes, especially little factual errors. This cannot be the answer. Applying Occam's Razor and a little common sense, we don't need conspiracies and elaborate secret alliances. If I had make a guess using the information you have offered here so far, it would seem much more likely that they were simply put off by your threat of legal action and the legal implications of admitting an error in print. Or perhaps there is more to the story than you have given us here.

      Delete
    2. Yes, everybody makes mistakes. Some mistakes are not all that important and don’t necessarily do a lot of damage. Some mistakes do cause a lot of damage, however. The Post’s misreporting of Liam Miller’s case is a case in point.

      Yes, it may well have been a common and garden cock-up but journalistic ethics and common decency should have resulted in a very hasty ‘correction’ – in whatever form the Post’s lawyers felt would not leave themselves open to litigation. For newspapers and governments alike the wording of such ‘corrections’ needs to be carefully thought through.

      By not moving swiftly, the Post has turned what should have been a mole hill into a mountain.

      So, what to do now? The first step, it seems to me, would be to make contact with Liam Miller and talk to him. Off the record, if need be. Find out what can realistically be done to rectify the publishing error without leaving the Post open to a defamation suit.

      I do not want to speak on Mr Miller’s behalf but I don’t think that suing for defamation is on his mind today – even if it was in the days after the misreporting when he was clearly (and quite justifiably) angry. I think that he just wants to be publically exonerated and hacve his reputation restored.

      In any event, it seems to me, even if Mr Miller did have the financial capacity to sue for defamation, that it would be a long shot at best. Chances are that a lot of money would be spent, by both sides, to achieve little or no positive outcome.

      I am not a lawyer but I imagine it would be relatively easy for the Post to publish an article along these lines: “On (date of publication) the Phnom Penh Post published an article that read: “(re-publish brief article). Mr Miller and the Phnom Penh Post have discussed this and agree that the article contained information that was subsequently found to be incorrect. Mr Miller and the Phnom Penh Post have reached an amicable agreement regarding the publication of this article and the matter can now be put to rest.”

      Something along these lines.

      Delete
  5. From the Cambodia Daily, 7th Oct:

    “The closed-door trial of a former director of anti-pedophile NGO Action Pour Les Enfants (APLE), who stands accused of sexually abusing 11 boys under his care at an orphanage he headed, began Tuesday with the testimony of a 22-year-old alleged victim, according to the defendant’s lawyer.”

    Why is Hang Vibol's trial being held behind closed doors?

    If the request for such a trial was made byt Action Pour les Enfants, what reason did APLE give in requesting what amounts to a secret trial?

    Here is the relevant secion of the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure:

    "Article 316. Public Nature of Trial Hearing and Confidentiality

    Trial hearings shall be conducted in public.

    However, the court may order a complete or partial in-camera hearing, if it considers that a public hearing will cause a significant danger to the public order or morality. (18) The court shall decide by a written decision separate from the judgment on the merits or by a special section within the judgment on the merits.
    The decision of the court to hold an in-camera hearing is not subject to appeal."

    What “significant danger to the public order or morality” is posed by holding a trial open to the public and media?

    This was the same ploy used by APLE when the NGO prosecuted David Fletcher. Perhaps Hang Vibol should count his blessings. At least he is able to attend his own secret trial – a priviledge not extended to David Fletcher.

    I hope that some journalist is prepared to ask Samleang Seila why APLE requested that the trial be conducted behind closed doors.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cambodian judicial corruption!!

      Delete
    2. Because it involves children and the courts dont want to release the details of these children to the public you fucking idiots. Stop thinking that everything is corrupt and for once perhaps ask some people who know a little bit more before you start dreaming up conspiracy and corruption theories.

      Delete
    3. Well said anon 8.31pm - in nearly all developed countries around the world courts often have closed sessions when it involves children. How typical of the low intellect of the Ricketson groupies to continually this that the courts are corrupt because they have a closed session. It is becoming boring to be honest!

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous 8.31

      Since you seem to know much more than I do about Cambodian law please enlighten us. Where, in the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure does it state:

      (a) That the person bringing the complaint has the right to remain unidentified.
      (b) That adults appearing before the court as witnesses (over the age of 18) have a right to remain anonymous.
      (c) That all criminal proceedings involving children or witnesses who were children at the time of the alleged offences must be carried out behind closed doors?

      It is right and appropriate that the identities of child witnesses remain secret but this does not necessitate that the entire judicial process must remain secret, as we witness time and time again in similar court cases in Australia and elsewhere.

      In a nutshell, what we have here is a complaint made by an anonymous person about an APLE employee (Hang Vibol) in which APLE not only conducts the investigation but employs APLE lawyers to prosecute the former APLE employee who, a few years earlier, accused yet another APLE employee (Thierry Darnaudet) of sexual misconduct with children and it is all taking place behind closed doors. It is hard to imagine a case in which there is a greater conflict of interest! And at the end of the whole procedure APLE will issue a press release of its own version of events that certain newspapers will report on word for word, asking no questions at all. In any country in the world where the rule of law prevailed, this legal farce would not be allowed to occur.

      Delete
    5. James, can't you tell by their language that they are not well educated. Please don't ask the ignorant for legal advice!

      Delete
    6. Its the discretion of the courts to decide what shall be public and what shall not be public. Who are you to question the Courts? This is where most people are getting tired of your drivel Ricketson - you seem to think that your way is the correct way and that everyone should follow what you say. If they dont, then you criticise and defame them on your blog, in many cases labelling them as corrupt. A delusional person is someone who maintains fixed false beliefs even when confronted with facts, usually as a result of mental illness!

      Delete
    7. Like all government institutions in a democracy the Cambodian judiciary should be open to questions and to criticism.

      Here, again, is the relevant section of the Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure:


      Article 316. Public Nature of Trial Hearing and Confidentiality
      Trial hearings shall be conducted in public.
      However, the court may order a complete or partial in-camera hearing, if it considers that a public hearing will cause a significant danger to the public order or morality. (18) The court shall decide by a written decision separate from the judgment on the merits or by a special section within the judgment on the merits.
      The decision of the court to hold an in-camera hearing is not subject to appeal.

      What “significant danger to the public order or morality” is posed by holding a trial open to the public and media?

      This is Cambodian law, which, as you will be aware, is regularly flaunted by the Cambodian judicial system. It is part of the role of the 4th estate to hold government instrumentalities accountable for theit actions.

      Or are you suggesting that the media should never question government bodies?

      Delete
  6. Dear Anonymous 9.53

    Reading this blog is not obligatory. If you are bored, find something that is not boring for you!

    Bear in mind this well known (to the point of being cliched) aphorism:

    "Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done."

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wait one second - I will send you some tissues Ricketson!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I notice that you have given up on the predator - Fletcher. He hasn't posted on your blog of late. Is that because you have forgotten to change your identity Ricketson - after all it is you who posts on his behalf.

    ReplyDelete